During the past election season, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) could have starred in a remake of the Hollywood cult classic “Attack of the 50-Foot Woman.” In an endless string of campaign ads, Republicans caricatured her — even put her image on billboards — as a political monster.

But now, the former House speaker more closely resembles “The Incredible Shrinking Woman.”

Her diminished stature has affected the way she is perceived in Washington’s power game and the way she handles her duties as head of the House Democratic minority. It all adds up to this: At times, the once-omnipresent Pelosi seems practically invisible in the Capitol.

When President Barack Obama, Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hammered out a deal last week to avert a shutdown and fund the government for the rest of the year, Pelosi was delivering a speech at Tufts University near Boston.

But her hands would have been idle if she had stayed in Washington: The White House didn’t want her involved in the talks.

In fact, Democratic and Republican sources tell POLITICO, none of the power brokers wanted her in the room. They feared that her presence and her defense of liberal values would have made it impossible for Obama to cut a deal with Boehner. The sources say Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky also was excluded so the White House could justify keeping Pelosi out.

Boehner, more or less, had McConnell’s proxy in negotiating with Senate Democrats and the White House.

Pelosi’s shutout from the biggest deal so far this year is a remarkable comedown for a former speaker who drove the legislative process in the past Congress. Some Democrats also say they’re steamed at the White House for mistreating Pelosi after she delivered the president’s legislative agenda in the past Congress and took lumps for him on the campaign trail. A Pelosi aide insists that during the budget negotiations, “she made it clear to all parties that there was a willingness on the part of House Democrats to work to keep government open.”

When the dems lost the majority in November, they should have replaced her as their leader in the House. I don't understand why they didn't, there are better people than her available in the dem party.

ralph wiggum

04-14-2011, 01:21 PM

When the dems lost the majority in November, they should have replaced her as their leader in the House. I don't understand why they didn't, there are better people than her available in the dem party.

Every party needs a fresh face to be the leader after a while. And I think she definitely needed to be replaced for that reason.

fettpett

04-14-2011, 01:21 PM

Paul Ryan is easily filling the void and then some, hell he's over taking Boehner and all the other Republican's.

AmPat

04-14-2011, 01:21 PM

When the dems lost the majority in November, they should have replaced her as their leader in the House. I don't understand why they didn't, there are better people than her available in the dem party.

That was true before the GOP took over. She was an idiot before, nothing has changed.

Adam Wood

04-14-2011, 02:57 PM

Every party needs a fresh face to be the leader after a while. And I think she definitely needed to be replaced for that reason.:D

You're bad.

lacarnut

04-14-2011, 03:25 PM

Every party needs a fresh face to be the leader after a while. And I think she definitely needed to be replaced for that reason.

Yep and the axe is going to fall on Boehner in 2012 whether the Repubs win, lose or draw. He just don't know it yet.

noonwitch

04-14-2011, 04:39 PM

That was true before the GOP took over. She was an idiot before, nothing has changed.

I agree that she was a problem for a while, but the election loss should have been the clincher for the DNC to realize they need a change.

Adam Wood

04-14-2011, 04:57 PM

I agree that she was a problem for a while, but the election loss should have been the clincher for the DNC to realize they need a change.They couldn't dare dis The First Woman Speaker™ by voting her out. That would be entirely too politically incorrect.

You sexist!

namvet

04-14-2011, 05:26 PM

EnHiN6Pwwos

8V37u82xSH8

Odysseus

04-14-2011, 05:49 PM

When the dems lost the majority in November, they should have replaced her as their leader in the House. I don't understand why they didn't, there are better people than her available in the dem party.
There are better people available sleeping on benches in LaFayette Park.

Every party needs a fresh face to be the leader after a while. And I think she definitely needed to be replaced for that reason.
Her face can be fresh again! She just needs more Botox!

The downside of Pelosi being out of the leadership is that she was like a .50cal M2 aimed at the Democratic Party's own foot, except that the ammo belt was endless and the barrel never melted down (even if she did). She did more damage to her own side every time she opened her mouth than any other politician during the last election cycle, with the possible exception of Obama. The Democrats are smart to let her keep a low profile.

Madisonian

04-14-2011, 07:27 PM

Every party needs a fresh face to be the leader after a while. And I think she definitely needed to be replaced for that reason.

I thought Nancy got a fresh face every year when the clocks jump forward?:confused:

Rockntractor

04-14-2011, 07:30 PM

She is past Botox, she needs a taxidermist.

noonwitch

04-15-2011, 09:55 AM

Yep and the axe is going to fall on Boehner in 2012 whether the Repubs win, lose or draw. He just don't know it yet.

The GOP should have picked Eric Cantor for SOH. He's smarter than Boehner and he's better looking.